Peace, Love and Thunderstanding: The Difference Between Winning and Losing

Growing up as a baseball player, two things became incredibly clear to me. Superstitions are nothing to mess with, and statistics are the lifeblood of sport. I was that guy who came off the field and grabbed the scorebook to keep myself entertained when it wasn’t my turn to bat. That led to me getting lobbied by a lot by teammates to score their one hopper to the pitcher that was airmailed into the stands as a double.

As I have grown older and become more obsessed with basketball, I have learned that basketball players are not very superstitious (how else can you explain the number of players who choose to wear the number thirteen–are they crazy?!?) and statistics are not as valuable to rating contributions on the floor (see Kevin Durant and plus/minus controversy).

Of course, that last bit of information has not stopped me from trying to find a way to find value in a player’s stat sheet. Today, that led me to comparing how the Thunder’s core players (Kevin Durant, Jeff Green, Russell Westbrook, and James Harden) perform when the team wins versus how they peform in losses this season. After the jump, I share what I found.

Kevin Durant

Surprisingly, I learned that K.D. has very little control of whether the team wins or loses. His numbers are shockingly consistent regardless of whether the team gets the W or not. On victorious nights, he piles up 29.3 points, and if the team comes out on the wrong end, he only scores 26.7. That difference seems to come from the three point line. He has double the three point percentage in wins (38% to 18%) and nearly one more make per game.

One thing I did notice, though, is that the spread of points in wins is uber-consistent–between 25 and 35 points. His three best scoring performances of the season (40 against the Clippers, 37 at Sacramento, and 36 against Boston) have come in games that did not go the Thunder’s way. Also, all three games in which he failed to reach twenty were losses.

Jeff Green

As consistent as K.D. has been, Green has been anything but. He certainly plays better in Thunder wins. Keep in mind, it isn’t that he plays differently… His shot attempts, defensive numbers, and fouls are the virtually the same. That means he isn’t be any more or less aggressive when the team is unsuccessful, he is just being more effective when they are successful.

In wins he shoots 48% from the field, 36% from three, and makes 82% of his free throws. In losses, those percentages fall to 38%-20%-68%. Considering that his attempts are approximately the same, it is no suprise that his scoring average is six points less in losses.

Russell Westbrook

It is probably time that I embrace the fact that Westbrook has the capability to be a “true” point guard. He has proven it this season. When the Thunder win, he averages 8.1 assists and has a sparkling 2.5/1 Assist-to-turnover ratio.

In losses, however, he is anything but John Stockton. From the numbers, it appears that he is much more aggressive, in general, when they lose. He has more than twice as many steals in a loss, more blocks, more rebounds and takes more shots (even making them at a higher clip). The one difference? He isn’t passing the ball (5.3 assists), and his turnovers jump from 3.2 to 4.4 making his assist-to-turnover ratio less than half of the figure in wins.

James Harden

When I started this exercise, I assumed that Harden would be the least crucial to determining the outcome. He is a rookie, isn’t a starter (yet), and he plays, by far the fewest minutes of the four guys expected to be who this team is built around. In the end, though, I am leaning toward saying he may be the most important X-factor.

His averages do not tell that story: In wins, he puts up 10.6 points, 2.9 assists, 3.5 rebounds, 1 steal, and 0.2 blocks. In losses, he puts up 8.6, 2.1, 2.0, 1.2, and 0.4. So basically, his line is no different.

Unfortunately, how he reaches those statistics is entirely different. In losses, Harden takes far more shots and makes far fewer. For instance, he makes just as many three point shots per game, but in losses he does it with four attempts, while in wins he takes about two. In all, he makes 53% of his shots from the floor on a successful night, but only 28% if the Thunder lose.

Anyway, next time you are watching a game, key on how well Green and Harden are shooting and how well Westbrook is running the offense. It will probably tell you all you need to know.

I don't know that these comparisons are fair because he wasn't a PF until this time, last year. He works hard and he took it really bad (at least from what I could tell on Twitter) when he threw up that clunker, scoring 6 points with a bunch of missed jumpers so I feel like he will learn to trust his inside game more than his outside game. And, he can definitely rebound but he's just not consistent. I bet you can find that kind of inconsistency among players in their 2nd year of that position. And please don't reference KD because I'm not even sure he's human.

We'll have to agree to disagree; however, the fact that Jeff Green produces at a rate below the average starting PF in the NBA is not a point that can be refuted. You're making a choice to analyze incomplete data; gross statistics that paint an imprecise picture when there are tools available that describe a player's production with more precision. I've shown that Jeff Green is below average, and that your three All Star forwards all reached their career rates of production by their third year or so (with gross variances affected by different levels of shot attempts and minutes played).

As far as +/- and Kevin Durant, much has been written on that subject. It is true that the OKC Thunder performed better without Kevin Durant on the floor, that is what +/- shows. It's not a point that can be refuted; the Thunder scored more points when KD was off the floor and gave up more points when he was on the floor. However, +/- is a noisy statistic and doesn't take into account some factors, and is only very accurate over a large sample size. A player with five or six years in the league, for example, will have a very telling +/- figure because by then the noise tends to average out.

Jeff Green's scoring efficiency and rebound rate are not 'noisy' statistics and are what they are; below average for a starting PF.

@justinThis exchange reminds me of Simmons' observations concerning Durant's +/-numbers, and how they showed the team performed better without him. I don't know nearly enough about how those numbers are determined to dispute his mathematical finding- but I am nevertheless certain that KD is a great player, and even considering trading or benching him based on that sort of statistical anylisis would be crazy. Though to a lesser degree, I feel the same way about Uncle Jeff.

Yes, you CAN reasonably expect a player with all of two years experience in the NBA to improve over the course of his third season. Yes, you SHOULD expect a player's individual stats to improve as the quality of his competition declines. Which of those two concepts needs further explaination? From where I'm sitting, his numbers don't look that far behind those of a trio of all-star powerforwards in their third year. He will likely finish with 2 more points and 2 fewer boards per game than Diaw. Claiming that something needs to be done about our "Jeff Green" problem seems plain goofy when he is obviously one of our team's best players.

I don't see how Jeff Green compares REMOTELY favorably to any of those guys. You're looking at gross points / rebounds / assists like those numbers mean something important but it's a very inaccurate, incomplete method of comparing production. And production is what getting wins is about.

All of those guys had a TS% at least .030 higher than Jeff Green, which is a considerable amount. They all scored at a much more efficient rate, mainly because Jeff is an inefficient jump shooter and those guys are generally playing closer to the basket and getting to the free throw line more (i.e. playing like a traditional power forward).

Jeff Green's total rebound percentage of ~10% is horrible for a power forward. West, Brand and Boozer all sported a figure at least 3% higher than Jeff Green, again a significant figure (and David West isn't known for being a dominant rebounder). Jeff Green was roughly equal to Boris Diaw in rebounding, but Diaw made up for that in assists and facilitating offense like a point guard (almost 3:1 A:TO).

Lastly, I don't see how you can 'reasonably expect Jeff's numbers to improve'. Let's take West, Brand, and Boozer as examples. By their third year, their rate of rebounding and scoring efficiencies were more or less right where they would stay through their primes. They'd get more minutes, and more shots, but their rates of production were determined long before their primes began. Jeff Green isn't going to suddenly grow his arms three inches and rebound 14% of available misses. It's possible he may develop a reliable post game and score more efficiently, but is it something to 'reasonably expect'? Kevin Durant's improvements over the past two years were almost immediately apparent after his sophomore and third years began. Why isn't Jeff Green showing the same improvements?

I dunno, the only one in that bunch that Green seems reasonably comparable to is Diaw. That's not a very high ceiling is it? A 9 Point/5 Rebound career guy? That said, I would like to have Diaw's passing ability. I'd be pleasantly surprised if Green picks that up, but I don't see it coming.

Uncle Jeff so far this year14.7/6.3/1.8I think we can reasonably expect Jeff's numbers to improve over the course of the season as he is still young enough to benefit from the additional experience, and the quality of our competition steadily declines as the season goes on.Sorry, but I'm still pretty happy with Uncle Jeff's production.

I think if you used the third year argument Jeff Green would be even further down on the list since guys like Kenyon Martin, Elton Brand, and Boris Diaw would blow him out of the water. Even Vladimir Radmanovic in his third year with Seattle put up comparable numbers to Jeff Green in a bench role in terms of production.

I have no problem with Jeff Green as a player, he'd probably be much mor efficient at his natural position and would be an average to above average starting small forward. However, if this team is going to contend for championships down the line, there is going to have to be consistent production from the front court coming from somewhere else besides Kevin Durant. When I raised these questions last year, the answer was 'give it until next year'. 'Next year' is almost 1/4 of the way through and it's arguable that Jeff Green has played even worse. So what's the next move?

@justinI'd be curious to see a comparison between Green's numbers and the superior PF's you list in their third year of play. Wouldn't that be more like comparing apples and apples? I would not be suprised to see Green lose his starting spot to Ibaka in a year or two, but all things considered, I'm pretty happy with what we are getting out of Uncle Jeff.

Jeff Green is having a lackluster statistical season compared with other starting PFs. I don't think there's much room for debate there. In terms of efficiency, rebs, asts, stls, blks, & tos, Green has been comparable to:

Martin, Brand, Diaw, Ilyasova, Gomes, Beaseley

I think you would be hard pressed to definitively declare that Green is having a notably better (or worse) season than any of them. That leaves:

Gibson, Boone, Chandler, Hickson, Radmanovic, Maxiell

Not exactly the pride of the NBA.

I think it's pretty ludicrous to say Murphy has been worse than Green. Even though he's been injured off and on, I still think he's been more efficient and a much better rebounder so far this year. Now that Granger's out, I expect to see Murphy's numbers to jump up closer to what we saw last season and pretty much ending the discussion.

So no, Green isn't a "bottom five PF," but it's hardly a point I would fight to the grave either. Maxiell's a backup, Gibson's a rookie, Hickson's practically a rookie, Chandler is playing out of his position in a unique system, similar situation for Radmanovic (plus just changed teams to boot), and I'm not exactly going to hang my hat on "better than Josh Boone" because that doesn't really say much, does it?

The picture gets even worse if you start talking about per minute stats because Green is a top 5 minutes guy. Not great.

Still, I'm not coming here saying I would much rather have someone else. There are a few guys in the top 10 who are obviously superior, but Green brings enough to the table (chemistry, potential, effort) that I'm not calling for a replacement. Give him time.

@Vega

If we're ever in a situation where Green can grab ~30 minutes off the bench, and we replace his starting spot with a solid top 15 PF, our team will be something very special instead of something potentially very special.

Trade idea for next tuesday: We send Thomas' expiring 7mill contract, our two first round picks and the T-Wolves sweet second rounder to Golden State for Biedrins. Why we should do this? Duh. Why G-State should accept? The Warriors stink and are definitely lottery bound anyways. Biedrins is signed through 2013/14 at 9mill per. Next year they have 10 players under contract (including Biedrins) for 53mill in payroll. By shedding Biedrins they would be able to offer a 5 year/100mill contract to the likes of Amare and CB4 without paying a tax penalty, and supplement their core of Ellis,Curry,Maggette,Randolph and Turiaf with three first round picks, and two low second rounders from one of the deepest drafts in recent memory. They also get to shave two mill in salary from this year's miserable season and avoid having Biedrins adding wins that hurt shot at picking 1 through 3 come June. Thoughts?

I'm glad somebody finally made this point on here. After watching Green clank wide-open threes for a while (which he does often in losses), and considering that with Thabo in the game they are already playing 4 on 5 on offense, it's no wonder that Westbrook takes more shots. Somebody has to try something.

Charlie V. is about equal this year with Green. He's slightly more efficient scoring and a slightly better rebounder. They are about equal defensively.

Kenyon Martin isn't having a great year, Jeff Green's out producing him. It's hard to quantify Martin's defense, though. He's one of the better low post defenders in the league.

Green's been better than Gibson.

Him and Diaw are about equal production wise.

Green's been better than Hickson. Radmanovic and Maxiell are injury replacements, I'm positive Maxiell is at any rate. Troy Murphy's been slightly more productive than Green this year (barely). It's close. Ilyasova has been VASTLY more productive than Jeff Green. Rebounds better, more efficient scoring. Turns the ball over less. Ryan Gomes and Green are about equal in production. Green is better than Boone and Chandler.

My point here wasn't to really say 'Jeff Green is a bottom five PF', it's more to say that he's not a budding superstar or anything, and below average at best even if you take f5alcon's list point for point.

Michael Beasley's having a better year than Jeff Green, Jason Maxiell and Vladimir Radmanovic didn't come up in my search since they are injury replacements I'm assuming? Elton Brand is not what he once was, but he's still producing more than Jeff Green.. it's close though. Forgot about Wilson Chandler, he's classified as a SF on my list, but I guess he is ipso facto PF. JJ Hickson didn't make my minutes cutoff, Green produces slightly more than him overall, obviously get more gross production due to minutes.

David West and Troy Murphy are more productive than Jeff Green, and they've had off years as well.

justin :Can you name five starting PF’s in the NBA that are having a worse season than Jeff Green? Off the top of my head, I can only think of Kenyon Martin, maybe Boris Diaw? Whoever the Bucks trot out there. Jeff Green’s closet comparison this year is super star Ryan Gomes.Russell Westbrook is the key to our success, and I’d think to a lesser extent James Harden and the bench. Our bench is very erratic in general and we seem to win games in which they perform well.

Are you kidding me?? you think Jeff Green is in the bottom 5 of Pfs in the NBA? Maxiell from detroit, boone from nets, brand from sixers, radmanovic, beasley, chandler from knicks, hickson from cavs... all these guys are currently starters and i dont believe it is even disputable that green is better than them. there are some other guys i would take green over but did not include because some may disagree with me. (west from hornets, murphy from pacers..)

The problem with statistics in ANY field, (and I have a fair amount of experience interpreting statistics from a research standpoint--NOT sports) is that, for as exact as they can be in showing associations, they are impossibly INaccurate and very often misleading when used to attempt to show causation.

Case in point--Harden. We can all agree to the average line he puts up in Ws vs. Ls, and no can question what his shooting percentages are either 58% vs 23% sounds impressive right? However, what that MEANS is entirely up for debate and assumption. Is Harden the X-factor that determines the Thunder's ultimate success on a given evening? I doubt it. I would suggest that this more accurately reflects him having an easier time/more advantageous matchup against the teams that we ultimately beat anyway. It is a symptom, not the underlying pathology if you will.

**BTW-Kudos to Clark for admitting to the POSSIBILITY that you have been wrong about Westbrook. That was nicely done, Jim Traber could learn a thing or two from you!

Can you name five starting PF's in the NBA that are having a worse season than Jeff Green? Off the top of my head, I can only think of Kenyon Martin, maybe Boris Diaw? Whoever the Bucks trot out there. Jeff Green's closet comparison this year is super star Ryan Gomes.

Russell Westbrook is the key to our success, and I'd think to a lesser extent James Harden and the bench. Our bench is very erratic in general and we seem to win games in which they perform well.

We do know that the likelihood of Green and Harden struggling with their shot in losses, so that could explain part of Westbrook's drop in assists and probably is a factor in him taking more shots. Then again, it could be the opposite. Harden and Green could struggle shooting in losses because Westbrook isn't passing as well and they are forcing shots because the offense isn't flowing well.

That's one of the limitations on statistics. They can only take your understanding so far.

I think the reason why statistics in basketball and baseball dont work the same way, is that in baseball one player cant do it all, everybody gets their turn at batting, in basketball one player could take every shot, imagine if in basketball each player had to take a turn shooting.

Also, i dont think its hardens performance so much that affects the outcome, its the 3rd scoring option. Like you said we win when durant doesnt score more then 35 points, and when jeff green shoots better. We are in the bottom 3rd of the league in shooting percentage as a team, so when we get 3 solid scorers performance or better we win, my premise is that 10 points or better is a solid scoring performance. here are our last 10 games.

So from what I found was that we need the combined scores of players that score over 10 points in the game to make up more then 70% of our points and our top 3 players score more then 62% of the poitns

You could also consider that if Jeff is having a poor shooting night, that his slack must be picked up by someone, and Russell is trying to be that guy.

Several people on this board seem to feel that Russell wants to be the star so bad that he plays out of control. Maybe we need to consider that he wants to win so badly that when his teammates aren't producing, he tries to take the burden on his shoulders. It doesn't work in either case, probably because Russell isn't quite ready to perform at that level.

Inferring his motivation however, is probably unfair. Inferring motivation should only be done in the context of personal interaction.

I know I responded to you Keith, but I wanted to say that I'm not pointing at you when I'm talking about "me first" motivation. I have seen that opinion here several times however, so in a way, this is a reply to several.

I think the article reinforces what everyone here has gotten a feel for throughout the season. Kevin is a star, and will play like our best player every night. Green can be a great PF, or he can be the thing we hope to trade for a high end big man. Westbrook can be a true PG, but will frustrate the heck out of you by playing like a bad SG. As much as Harden's splits have fluctuated, I don't think he's our x-factor yet (though he's getting there). His minutes and average box scores simply don't speak to being a main contributor. Take away his 10-3-3.5 even in wins, and it's not hard to think it could be made up by other bench guys.

Russell invariably seems to be the x-factor. If he is willing to sacrifice his own points, slow down, and make smart decisions, we can beat anyone. If, however, he wants to prove that he can get 20+ points and forgets that his job is to help everyone else, then we will almost invariably lose. Green is an x-factor in that he can be anywhere from mouse quiet to bull dominant, but the fact is he brings the same game every night. Sometimes it just works out better than others.

Harden is hard to pin down. He has games where he scores 26 and games where he scores two. I didn't want to remove any statistical outliers figuring that the data would smooth out, and I think it did.

Also, why give Harden's numbers the benefits of removing the 0-10? That shows the rookie in him. You would think a veteran would say, "you know what, I'm not hitting from this range, maybe I should try something different." And while it wasn't particularly relevant to the outcome of that game, it was a loss and he did shoot poorly.

Nice work, but it really isn't a complete article without doing lines for Kristic and Thabo. I imagine Kristic shoots terrible in losses.

Also Harden's numbers are a bit skewed because earlier in the season he got more mintues in blowouts. In the Lakers game he went 0-10 from the 3pt line. You almost have to completely throw that night out of the equation (nothing he could have done would have brought us back in that game). We know Harden's a better shooter than 0-10 and they were completely junk minutes.